[Dragon] First D&D 3.5 Update

[ColonelHardisson]

Defense Bonus and Reputation would, I think, be FAR to large of a change.

True, but they would make nice variant rules. However, I think they're in the d20 Modern SRD, if I didn't misread.

 

[Oni]

Optional or not the more new and different things they include the more I have to pick and choose from when it comes game time. I know that there are bound to be changes that I will not like and that I'll probably go back to the original 3e for, so I'm all for a whole lot of change. Like I said in another thread if the changes aren't extreme enough I simply will not by the book, I'm not paying for the same material twice just to have the newest edition. I'm not required to buy it, and if they don't make it worth my while I'm not going to.

 

[Nightfall]

*Huge grin*

Every one of those notions gets a huge thumbs up from me.

Same here mouse.

 

[reapersaurus]

one warning - let's not go into this Change assuming that something new = something bad, or "unbalancing".

 

[KnowTheToe]

I'm not sure this revision will be dramatic enough to qualify for D&D 3.5. Maybe just D&D 3.1.

I agree. I bet 3.5 hits in 2005-06.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

Just out of curiosity, has WOTC said anything about character gen programs for 3.5? The "demo" included with the PH was a great (though limited) program and made creating characters and starting play much easier. It sounds like the changes they're planning are going to break every current character generator, including E-Tools - any chance WOTC will include another "demo" generator with the new PH? If not, will they be providing early info to any third parties who want to produce one?

 

[Aaron L]

Everything looks cool to me. I'm looking forward to the new books. My PHB is falling apart (I use my books til they die

 

[dcollins]

Once again, my main concern is in the arena of playtesting.

I have yet to hear WOTC or anyone else say that they're doing any out-of-house playtesting on this rules revision, and that concerns me. One of the things that impressed me about 3rd Ed. was the obvious dedication to a wide playtest of the core rules; one of the things that depressed me about 2nd Ed. was the obvious disregard for same, and haphazard changes made at the whim of individual writers.

 

[Nightfall]

I gave up worrying about play testing long ago. Why? Because no matter how well you plan or try to work around some one's need to just be a min-maxer, they will STILL find ways to ruin someone's idea of "balance."

 

[Kichwas]

I thought the last couple years of player feedback online and elsewhere was the playtesting they used to determine what goes into these new books.

I'm with others who see it as 3.1 btw.